Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
entry-offline-mcp

entry-offline-mcp

by l2l2l4
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

entry_block_reference

Searches and retrieves Entry block definitions, including categories, input arguments, statement counts, and Entry-Python syntax, to help you author or convert block scripts accurately.

Instructions

블록 사전(실행 중인 엔트리에서 직접 읽음). 인자 없이 호출하면 카테고리 목록. category: start, flow, moving, looks, brush, text, sound, judgement, calc, variable, func, analysis, ai_utilize, expansion, arduino. query: 블록 type/한글 문구/파이썬 문법 검색(공백=AND). types: 특정 블록 type들의 상세. 결과: type, text(블록 문구; [KEY]=입력칸), args(입력칸 순서·종류·옵션·기본값), statements(내부 블록 묶음 수), python(엔트리파이썬 문법).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "entry_block_reference"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryNo
typesNo
detailNo
categoryNo
include_hiddenNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals that the data comes from the “running Entry” instance, which implies a prerequisite, and it enumerates the returned fields. However, it does not state what happens if no Entry instance is running, whether the operation is read-only, or how hidden blocks are treated despite having an include_hidden parameter.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is dense but front-loaded: the core identity and no-argument behavior come first, parameter semantics follow, and return fields come last. The telegraphic style compresses information without stray wording, though the use of middle-dot separators over full sentences slightly reduces readability.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, so the description appropriately documents the return fields (type, text, args, statements, python). However, with six parameters, zero schema coverage, and no annotations, leaving three parameters and all error or prerequisite behavior unspecified means an agent cannot invoke it fully correctly without guessing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the schema. It defines query (space = AND, searching type, Korean block text, or Python syntax), enumerates all 16 category enum values, and explains types. However, it leaves limit, detail, and include_hidden entirely undocumented, so half the parameters remain unspecified in both the schema and the description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a concrete noun that names the resource: "블록 사전" (block dictionary), and it adds an operational detail: it reads directly from the running Entry instance. This makes it distinguishable from generic guide or asset-search tools. However, it never names a sibling tool or says explicitly how it differs from the other entry_* reference and guidance tools, so differentiation depends on inference.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It clearly explains the internal usage pattern: call with no arguments to get categories, pass category to browse, query to search, and types to get specific details. This is useful guidance on how to invoke the tool. However, it gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as the guide tool, and it states no exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools